CASE REPORT
A 56-year-old man with RT-PCR negative nasopharyngeal swabs with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pneumonia
 
More details
Hide details
1
Chair and Department of Infectious Diseases, Medical University, Lublin, Poland
2
Chair and Department of Internal Diseases, Medical University, Lublin, Poland
3
Institute of Rural Health, Lublin, Poland
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Anna Dworzańska   

Medical University of Lublin Chair and Department of Infectious Diseases, Staszica 16, 20-081, Lublin, Poland
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2020;27(2):317–318
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Diagnostic procedure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is based mainly on performing real-time-reverse transcription-polymerase chain-reaction (RT-PCR), which has been accepted as the gold standard method. In some cases, such as mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, variable viral load kinetics or laboratory errors, it can be false-negative.

Case report:
The case is presented of a 56-year-old man with respiratory tract symptoms, with twice negative results of real-time-reverse transcription-polymerase chain-reaction of nasopharyngeal swabs and positive chest computed tomography, with typical findings for COVID-19 pneumonia.

Conclusions:
Patients with negative RT-PCR results, but with positive computed tomography findings characteristic for COVID-19, should be treated as well as those infected.

 
REFERENCES (12)
1.
Gorbalenya AE, Baker SC, Baric RS, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome related coronavirus: The species and its viruses a statement of the Coronavirus Study Group. Microbiology. 2020 Feb 19. doi: /10.1101/2020.02.07.937862.
 
2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Atlanta; 2020. Available from https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru....
 
3.
Guang Chen, Di Wu, Wei Guo, et al. Clinical and immunologic features in severe and moderate forms of Coronavirus Disease 2019. J Clin Invest. 2020 Apr 12. doi: 10.1172/JCI137244.
 
4.
Wang X, Tan L, Wang X, et al. Comparison of nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection in 353 patients received tests with both specimens simultaneously. Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 94: 107–109.
 
5.
Fang Y, Zhang H, Xie J, et al. Sensitivity of Chest CT for COVID-19: Comparison to RT-PCR. Radiology. 2020 Feb 19. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200432.
 
6.
Tahamtan A, Abdollah A. Real-time RT-PCR in COVID-19 detection: issues affecting the results. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2020 Apr 22: 1–2. doi: 10.1080/14737159.2020.1757437.
 
7.
Phan T. Genetic diveristy andevolution of SARS-CoV-2. Infect Genet Evol. 2020 Feb 21(81): 104260.
 
8.
Xie X, Zhong Z, Zhao W, et al. Chest CT for Typical 2019-nCoV Pneumonia: Relationship to Negative RT-PCR Testing. Radiology. 2020 Feb 12. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200343.
 
9.
Huang P, Liu T, Huang L, et al. Use of chest CT in combination with negative RT-PCR assay for the 2019 novel coronavirus but high clinical suspicion. Radiology. 2020 Feb 12. doi: org/10.1148/radiol.2020200330.
 
10.
Tao Ai, Yang Z, Hou H, et al. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China: A Report of 1014 Cases. Radiology. 2020 Feb 26. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200642.
 
11.
Jiang GM, Ren X, Liu Y, et al. Application and optimization of RT-PCR in diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2-infection. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Feb. doi: 10.1101/2020.02.25.20027755.
 
12.
Bai HX, Hsieh B, Xiong Z, et al. Performance of Radiologists in Differentiating COVID-19 From Viral Pneumonia on Chest CT. Radiology. 2020 Mar 10. 200823. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200823.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966